Well said Sue. What we need more of is higher taxes and subjecting those funds to public decision-making processes like the Portland Strategic plan, CIM/CAM, Cultural Competency and retaining the high quality of Jefferson High School. Sorry for the sarcasm. But gee whiz, why is every outsider to be tainted? The insiders have screwed up over and over again.

As a 38 year Oregon resident, and two kids that went through public schools in Portland (Wilson; 1995) and Tigard (1986), and as a 35 year long public University Professor (retired), I can tell you that Oregon's public schools have long sucked, long before Measure 5. Oregonians delude themselves that the schools were ever that good. So no matter how much or how little money we've thrown at the public schools, they have only gotten worse, not better. Why not accept a little outside help and advice. It surely cannot hurt and it might actually help.

For perspective, my father-in-law (RIP) came to the same conclusion about the Portland public schools when his children were of school age. Not one of them (four) went to a public school. As an atheistic, he had no qualms about sending both daughters to St. Mary's Academy, and both sons to Central Catholic, and all to the University of Portland. My wife is the youngest of the four. She graduated high school 40 years ago. So I hardly think my Californian perspective on Oregon public education is new.

If Bill Gates wants to donate money to improve the quality of public education, Oregon should take it if offered. Our public education quality has sucked for a long time and I don't think that private money could possibly hurt the schools more than any of the tax money and public decision-making that has occurred here for at least 50 years.

P.S. Our youngest child (adopted) has attended a private school since Kindergarten.

When one understands that our educational system was formed on the educational system of Prussia, where, to quote Pink Floyd, a child is simply "another brick in the wall", where free-thought is not encouraged, where children are pumped out into society so that they may be another "cog" in the wheel to keep the current economic/social/political system going, one can clearly see why our public school system, well, sucks. How many of us really enjoyed school? I couldn't wait to get out so I could actually think for myself.

The Gates/Microsoft Monopoly was created and has existed, in part, BECAUSE of the very system he is wanting to change. It's all connected, afterall. A truly progressive, successful school system encourages free thought, opportunity for ALL, and is one that allows our children to question the hell out of everything.

I also wonder--do his children attend public or private schools?

If Bill Gates wants more american computer scientists, all he has to do is show stability in the field. Why should anybody go in to that feild when they know that a guy from india who will work for a dollar an hour can take his job away from him? the bills for the collage education don't go away just becuse you lost your job. instead, they get worse. If Bill Gates wants to change education, prove to the public that hyderbad won't steal work from redmond.

Gregory

Gates is right. The public likes the "idea" of improving education but not the reality. The politics simply reflect the public attitudes about culture. My wife has worked in the Oregon system for over 20 years. We are both graduates of that system secondary and univervsity. What we have now is much worse than 40 years ago. The most affluent schools have the most resources but when kids are sitting in school with I-pods in their ears and text messaging each other, and thinking about their next drunk and their next sexual opportunity, you can forget education. When they can tell their teacher to go f___ off and nothing happens, you can forget education. We know what works in education, and we have the resources to provide it. There isn't the will to have a discipline of education, either in the classroom, the library, or the home. Period.. And that isn't a class or ethnic thing, that's an American thing. Oprah Winfrey was right. She invested her money in a school in South Africa for young girls hungry for learning and disciplined to achieve it. She said it is a waste here in the U.S. where youth culture is more interested in everthing except education and the broader culture only gives lip service.

I can see where certain people with extraordinary wealth and and the will to apply it in a muscular way upon society might might be inclined to do so, but Bill Gates? I'm not so sure. His expression of interest in improving education for americans seems genunine. Maybe education isn't something he's figured out yet, or maybe he's just impatient or naieve.

Bushco and the republicans interest in pumping up education seem merely to arise from the fact that certan other countries of the world and thereby their economies, are leaping over the economy of the U.S. Do they really care about the reality of upcoming generations of americans daily and future life. Probably not so much, unless it can be somehow plugged into the generation of national, internationally competitive wealth.

Higher taxes dedicated to improving education might be o.k., but this jumps right on the question of who can afford to pay taxes sufficient to make such improvements. The answer undoubtedly upsets a lot of people that want to become rich.

What exactly are people saying when they cite private schools as examples where education is superior to that in private shools? My impression is that they really don't have a clue other than they spent x-thousands of dollars to send johnny and susie to some exclusive facility and now they're getting better grades.

The kids may have got better grades there but people do not really seem to understand why. I really doubt that those better grades have to do with teachers at such schools working harder. The real answer probably has to do with such kids home life and the priority their parents place on making it a sound foundation for a kid to approach their education from.

In this country, we really know how to screw up a lot of kids heads from within their very own households, if they're so lucky to have one, from the time they are very young. When people start to realize this and make tangible, consistent efforts to address the syndrome, possibilities for improvement in public education might be possible. Bill Gates efforts to improve public education might well be better applied in this area.

Man...it sucks to have the richest man in the world giving away money hand over fist to schools and trying to promote education onto an election that is coming up. Boy that is such a waste of money isn't it? Promoting education and spending a bunch of the money you earned on education.

Ahem...maybe you should target a guy who doesn't give away billions of dollars to good causes.

ws writes: "What exactly are people saying when they cite private schools as examples where education is superior to that in private shools? My impression is that they really don't have a clue other than they spent x-thousands of dollars to send johnny and susie to some exclusive facility and now they're getting better grades."

Trust me. I know. I've put two kids through public schools in Oregon and have been in Oregon Higher Education for more than 30+ years. Our third child is private schools not because we're elitist but because we've had the experience of the public schools with our first two children. I myself am a product of a superb public education system -- in California in the 40's, 50's and 60's.

My youngest gets a superb education in her private school because the education is focused, intense, and highly personal. Largest class size is 16; typical is 10. Teachers are well-paid, dedicated, and the school is small enough that EVERYONE knows EVERYONE. The school brooks no sh*t from parents or students, regardless of the cost.

So, when you suggest that we who send our kids to private schools don't know anything except that we pay x-bucks and our kids get better grades, I'd suggest you do a little fact-finding. Your information is wrong.

To hell with this issue. school is just a place for kids to go to improve there social interaction within the society and there peers in culture. As learning grows, you are taught the basic as required information via a set of benchmarks. But no matter what, parents forget that most of this learning happens at home. Alas, Most parents do not have the time or the patience for this structure. I can honestly not see how I can ever watch TV for anything except background noise and specials on Discovery. Add in real family time and there is no room for enjoyment. For those of you out there that are parents to 3 kids or more, you will understand this all to well. Add in variables of autism, childhood diseases and the mass of other things that can go wrong, not to mention divorce and parenting issues, you soon realize that that in order to raise children to the bar, you give up yours...

mrfearless47 wrote:

The school brooks no sh*t from parents or students, regardless of the cost.

That's the key, right there. While yes, the schools have to be accountable to the parents for the results of the education provided, in return both parents and students have to accept the responsibility for their learning (or lack thereof). Too many public school parents don't care, and that attitude shows up in their kids.

Another key is class size--you can do a lot more, and provide more intensive, direct, hands-on one-on-one teaching in a private school that has class sizes of 10-16 students than in a public school classroom that has 25 students.

Although my private school experience was not as stellar as mrfearless's--I had private school teachers tell me that, at class sizes of 15-17 kids, they had too many kids to give my child the individual attention he needed.

In public school, with classes that had at least 10 more kids, I never heard that comment. I have had those same teachers and my colleagues snort in derision when I've told them that comment (usually followed by "I'd kill to just have 15-17 kids in a class!").

I do not get what Mr Sadler is kvetching about. If Gates wants to give money to schools and designate how it is spent, god bless him. I mean the schools are incapable of fixing themselves, so maybe he does have a better idea.

As far as public/political will my interpretation is that the public has given up on public schools fixing themselves and politically it is easier to maintain the same sorry status quo in schools.

I'm struck by this passage, and forgive me if I'm violating Russell's context:

"Parents will reject any reform that makes them unable to help their children with their homework. No parent is willing to appear stupid in front of their children."

I.E.: "if not learning about cosines was good enough for me, it's good enough for you, kid."

Sucks to be those kids.

This Public Agenda Poll from Fall 2005 might interest you:

Question: Thinking about the education your child is getting at his/her current school, do you think its better, worse or about the same as the education you got at his/her age?

Better 61% Worse 14% The same 23% Don't know 2%

Source

"My youngest gets a superb education in her private school because the education is focused, intense, and highly personal." mrfearless47

O.K., but how is it that the education is able to be focused, intense, and highly personal? I would expect that at least in part, it's because the kids in those schools are goofing around to far less a degree than many kids in public school are. The reason they aren't goofing around, is probably because their parents are willing, able to, and are actively providing them with at least the minimum of support neccessary to do reasonably well in a focused, intense, highly personal educational setting.

Many parents of kids being sent to a private school likely understand they've made a conscious deliberate decision to go the extra mile to get an education for their kids. No doubt they also understand and are able to provide the neccessary away from school conditions that most kids need in order to function effectively in school.

Just compare cross sections of kids and parents in public schools with those of private schoos and I'll be some ominous indications of problem sources will pop right up. We have some really messed up people in our society. Really messed up people are not going to be able to provide the kind of away from school conditions that will allow their kids to do well in any school, public or private.

I appreciate Gate's efforts, but I really hope he starts to emphasize this failing of american society as personal, public appearances associated with his public school reform efforts arise on his schedule. Maybe that will help to get some kind of national consciousness going on and begin work towards correcting unhealthy circumstances of many american families that represent major obstacles to genuine public education reform.

Who is paying right wing trolls to pollute Blue Oregon posts? Ninety percent of the time that I view comments on this site, I see the most aggressive and infantile attacks.

1) Mr. "Fearless 47": You are embarrassing yourself with cira 1998 intertubes handle. Show some courage and use your real name when you want to engage in actual debate.

2) Very convincing arguments. "Oregon public schools suck." Your support is that you work in "higher education" (Doing what? It's hard to imagine a professor making such ignorant statements.) and that you send your kids to private schools (yea for you).

3) I've dedicated my career to educating the children of Portland. I spent 14 years in high tech, spent $40k and 2 years of my life getting my M.Ed., have a 138 IQ, am an accomplished violist, have 3 children in PPS, and happen to be a damn good teacher. What we need in this state is more people pulling together to better support education (i.e. smaller class sizes and longer school year) and fewer lobbing ignorance grenades into the public forum.

Christopher writes:

"Who is paying right wing trolls to pollute Blue Oregon posts? Ninety percent of the time that I view comments on this site, I see the most aggressive and infantile attacks.

1) Mr. "Fearless 47": You are embarrassing yourself with cira 1998 intertubes handle. Show some courage and use your real name when you want to engage in actual debate.

2) Very convincing arguments. "Oregon public schools suck." Your support is that you work in "higher education" (Doing what? It's hard to imagine a professor making such ignorant statements.) and that you send your kids to private schools (yea for you)."

1. Click on my nickname and you will be taken to my website where my full name can be found with even a modicum of effort. As for it being 1998 nickname, in my case I've been called "fearless" since elementary school in the early 1950's, so I hardly think is is a 1998 moniker.

2. My years in higher education were all spent on the faculty and as the chair of two Departments. Again, a trip to my web page would give you my Curriculum Vita that includes 75 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and books, and honors including outstanding prof of the year at PSU.

3. As far as my use of the term "suck", my children's experiences are so broad, so awful, and so numerous that it would take an entire website to respond to your question. Suffice it to say that I've shared them with area coordinators and the school superintendents in two districts. My concerns were never small and spanned the teaching qualifications of countless teachers, uncaring administrators, clueless principals, and unsupervised anarchy. I'm delighted that you've poured your life into teaching and consider yourself one of the "good ones".

4. Finally, as a point I didn't add to my original post, my perspective also comes from teaching college freshman for more than 30 years. I've had students from all of the Oregon highschools, public and private. I can honestly say that after teaching more than 15,000 students in Freshman classrooms, and following significantly fewer into upper division and graduate courses, that the least well-prepared students (poorest writing skills, lack of competence in math skills, and poor public speaking skills) came from Oregon's public high schools. The best public school students came from Vancouver and Camas and the occasional Californian. The best students overall came from any of a half-dozen local private schools. The most numerous were from St. Mary's Academy, across the street.

I'm sorry I wasn't precise enough for you, but if you were curious in the least, a click on my name would have found me without more energy than a mouse click.

For a detailed, progressive view of why Bill Gates and other corporate leaders are NOT friends of public education read Barbara Miner's essay "Who's Behind the Money?" And if you are still not convinced, ask someone from Portland's Jefferson High School PTSA what Gates' money did for their school.

http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/19_04/who194.shtml Some quotes from the article are below.

"Regardless of a foundation's politics, the growing role of private money in public school reform raises concerns about democratic control of public education.

Throughout the country, various education initiatives — from small schools to vouchers to pay-for-performance to charters — are often instituted not because the community demanded them, but because some foundation decided to fund the initiatives. Conservatives have been particularly adept at claiming the reforms came from the bottom up.

The problem of foundation-driven reform is particularly acute given the budget cuts facing public schools. Because public dollars are focused on essential services, schools and districts often look to foundations to fund new initiatives...

All of which gives foundations — private institutions with private boards, behind-the-scenes decision-making and no public accountability for the success or failure of their programs — inordinate power in determining public policy....

Strategically, the most viable way to decrease reliance on foundation-driven reform is by increasing publicly controlled resources for schools — which would entail corporations and wealthy individuals paying their fair share of taxes.

"Once you have made the fundamental decision that people get to hold onto their wealth and are not taxed, you have set up the system for an oligarchy," argues Dudley. "There's no getting around it. You cannot re-democratize it after you have set up that system."

Conspicuously absent from Russell Sadler's column is a project that could definitely change our nation's educational system for teh better - school choice.

I know all the arguments for and against - but what the nation needs is a guinea pig. I would suggest taking one of the worst performing school districts in the nation - Washington DC comes to mind, and putting a complete voucher system in place. And then wait a decade and see what happens. If things go well, we will know school choice works. If things don't then things will be no sorse than they are now for the guinea pig school district's students.

But I would point out that there is a key portion of our nation's educational system where school choice reigns supreme - higher education. And it is universally acknowledged that the U.S. has the best quality university system in the world.

Correction

Regardless of a foundation's politics, the growing role of private money in public school reform raises concerns about democrat and union control of public education.

Several points: (1) More info on ED in 08 can be found on their website. (2) I share Russell's concerns about national standards. For example, I am not not convinced every student all across America needs more math at the expense of other courses. So the national push on more math worries me. (3) Many more students, but certainly not all, do need foreign languaqes. Nationally we do need to target different languages (Mandarin, Hindi, Arabic, for examples), start students as young as possible, immerse them in the foreign language as much as possible, and send those willing during high school to study where the language is spoken for as long as possible. I do not see Ed in 08 nor the Gates Foundation concerned about foreign languages. (4) All that said, if ED in 08 can raise public understanding of some of these educational issues, it will be useful.

What an education quagmire thiks all is.

Oregon wallowed near the bottom in course requirements math and english during the entire CIM/CAM fiasco. You all seem to have forgotten that little meddling mess.

Adding the one more year of each is not an excess and it should have been done clear back in 1991 instead of the outcome based education CIM/CAM reform. Those so called high standards were nothing short of fraud in application and while the very low standards in math and english course requirements prevailed during all of CIM/CAM the push to continue the reform was stunning. Not to mention the plethera of phony praises of CIM/CAM heaped upon the masses by it's defenders. CIM/CAM defenders very familliar here on BlueOregon. Education "guru", or not, Steve Novick for starters was there at every turn defending the system. A parade of other democrats and various "stakeholders" defended the indefensible as raising student performance year in year out for the 15 years of reform. It was all cooked up, unreliable and flat out propaganda with newspaper stories echoing every touting claim.

Today we have these same types, defenders of CIM/CAM, worried about Gates and others meddling with public education?

Hypocrisy is in full bloom as an upthread remarks,

"ask someone from Portland's Jefferson High School PTSA what Gates' money did for their school"

Wow what a shameless comment. On the heals of decades of perpetual Jefferson failure at the hands of all things status quo, a near immediate judgement is passed that "Gates" barely a year old effort is worthless?????

It is stunning that people in this mindset failmiserably to recognize that it is the status quo death grip on public education which avoids ALL public accountability for the success or failure of their programs. The inordinate power of our education regime makes sure that no matter the massive size and failure of a program not a single person faces any consequences for the damage done.

Yet here we have stakeholders suddenly emerging in hyper-sensitive mode ready to demand accountability be thrust upon those not ready to repreat the last decades with business as usaul.

No, the status quoers have a message. "We must keep the same people doing the same things but give them more money" And "beware of the outsiders".

That's quite an impressive message.

ws:"O.K., but how is it that the education is able to be focused, intense, and highly personal? I would expect that at least in part, it's because the kids in those schools are goofing around to far less a degree than many kids in public school are."

Well, that and private schools get to choose and reject students. So all that per-student savings they get, well, they're not paying for all the autistic kids, the Downs syndrome kids, the behavior problem kids and so forth. That's left up to the taxpayers, of course. Which is why it costs more.. per student of course.

One way you could save a ton of money would be by changing the rules slightly so that Expelled means Expelled -- as in, the school district is no longer required to educate you if you get kicked out for bad acts. (Of course, that would probably shift your unavoidable public costs over to the criminal justice system, but we're apparently okay with that in this state.)

You could also create different tracks -- there are some kids who, let's face it, are never going to college and are never going to have complicated jobs. If you've earned your way into a track involving, say, pushing grocery carts, that track should be pretty cheap to educate you along. Yeh?

Curt

Mrheartless47, I mean mrfearless47, and the rest of the haters all say Oregon schools suck.

Okay, then why do OUR kids score the highest SAT scores in the country, year in and out?

Facts, not fiction, at www.sat.org.

Have a great day, folks! And be sure to give me an answer, when you find one. I won't wait up.

Sid:

I know the facts about the SAT scores. I also know that Oregon kids take the SAT at a lower rate than many comparator states and so the test results bias towards those who would do well regardless of school they attended.

I don't hate the public schools. I am product of the public schools and I taught in the public university system for 35 years. I'm also not elitist. If I were lucky enough to have children that could do well in school regardless of where they went -- complete self-starters -- then we wouldn't be having this conversation. But my kids were never rocket scientists and required considerable motivation and attention. We (my wife and I) devoted huge amounts of time helping our kids and helping them try to get help. Because they were average, none of the schools they attended, were willing to help. They focused on the kids whose parents couldn't effectively home-school them. We were asking for nothing except time and attention the school couldn't and was unwilling to provide. All we asked for is teachers who would do a few things for us to help up help our daughters. They wouldn't. They didn't have time. This was true in Tigard in the 1980's and in the PPS (Wilson High School) in the early 1990's. Even after we adopted our youngest daughter and decided to send her to private schools, we have continued to donate our kicker dollars to whatever public school district we have lived in. We want the public schools to succeed, but we have seen how they operate in Oregon for a very long time at a very personal level. But, I don't think that the schools have had the right attitude for a very long time. The Oregon citizenry has not ever considered high quality education from K-PostGrad a priority. Measure 5 only hastened the deterioration of an inferior product. I continue to be amazed at how well they limp by, carried on the shoulders of a dedicated group of parents who continue to place their trust in the schools and whose kids would do well in schools in South Central LA. Peel out all the overachievers and you get a very mediocre product, I'm sorry to say. I have seen this over and over and over again while teaching at PSU. Students who can't write, who can't compute, and who can't utter a grammatically correct sentence if their life depended on it. It is an observation reinforced by 35 years of seeing the same starting point quarterly. It is a sad commentary. That said, I can see no point in refusing the Gates money or asking for less of it simply because Mr. Gates doesn't like the way education in the US is going. Mr. Gates could be right. The status quo is unacceptable.

Sorry that you take my comments so personally and sorry if I sound like I "hate" the public schools. Not true. I just think it is foolish to refuse philanthropy because it has some strings that suggest the old ways don't work. If they did, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Oh, and BTW. My daughter is going to a "public" high school, not a private one. It is just that we aren't in the district and we will have to come up with about $10K in tuition. That's OK because this particular school is smaller and more personal than any of the private schools we considered. And for our daughter, that's what she needs. So, not only am I paying taxes for schools my kids have never used, I'm paying tuition to a public school in a different school district so that my daughter can get what we feel she needs.

Curt writes: "well, that and private schools get to choose and reject students. So all that per-student savings they get, well, they're not paying for all the autistic kids, the Downs syndrome kids, the behavior problem kids and so forth. That's left up to the taxpayers, of course. Which is why it costs more.. per student of course."

It is not the case that the cost per student in a private school is necessarily less than in the public schools. The Catholic schools are often cited as an example. For reference, the tuition at Jesuit, Central Catholic, and St. Marys all hover at $8600 per year (this from applying to all three for our daughter's schooling next Fall). If you are Catholic, the archdiocese of Portland subsidizes each school with an additional $1500 per student. That about equals the published spending per student in the PPS. The difference is that the Catholic schools can spend the money on better labs, better libraries, better counselling, and more college prep services.

For further reference, the tuition at Oregon Episcopal and Catlin Gable have now crested $20,000 per year for high school. Again, we know because our daughter has been at OES for the past 10 years (pre-K - 8th grade). Tuition increases are 7% annually for the entire time we've been there. Take a look at today's Oregonian for the number of OES students who won money at this year's Intel International Science Competition. Not bad for a school whose high school has 260 students. But it also has grad school equipped laboratories and an near maniacal focus on math and science education.

I can't speak for any other private school although I know there are a number I don't have information for - NW Academy, PJA, Portland Christian, Portland Adventist, St Mary's of the Valley.

But I think the take-home message is that private schools aren't much cheaper per student than the public schools are and many are significantly more expensive. The difference is in how the money can be used and it is obvious that the requirements of public education make it impossible to do some of the things that make private schools a better choice for many families.

Finally, to throw a curve into all the allegations that I'm heartless, I "hate" public schools, and I'm a right-wing wack job, let me again remind readers of two important facts: 1) every "kicker" is donated back to the public schools in our local district and 2) I'm am strongly opposed to vouchers and school choice. I don't think the private schools are a threat to the public schools, but I think the public and public schools are a threat to themselves.

My experience is that public school is just something you endure until you can get into a good college. Then you can go really learn something in an environment where learning is still somewhat encouraged.

My youngest child is in preschool at one of the best public schools in the area. She is at an age where she loves to learn. She'll read books at home and do math problems with her older brother. At school they just play. The teacher refuses to teach the kids anything since it isn't "part of the program". It is really a waste of time for her to even go to school since the teacher won't help her learn anything but that is the way the system runs. We've talked to the school but that doesn't help any. We just get the standard excuses about class size and standard policy and the need to spend time with the English as 2nd language students, etc.

Why are you against school choice and vouchers?

Obviously, you choose your own school (and pay up to be able to do so, while also paying for the local public school), so why would you prohibit the same behaviour for other people who don't have the resources you have?

Or do you think everybody else has also spent 35years in a university job with a huge PERS retirement package that pay some retirees more after they retired than what they made when they were teaching?

Harry

Harry writes:

"Or do you think everybody else has also spent 35years in a university job with a huge PERS retirement package that pay some retirees more after they retired than what they made when they were teaching?"

When are you going to stop believing these lies? I don't make more in retirement than when I was teaching. In fact, I know thousands of PERS retirees and have never met one who makes more in retirement than while working. This fact applies to only a very small percentage of the PERS workforce and involved some very unusual circumstances. It never affected more than a few hundred people. Time to let this lie die its death. It is patently false and a careful review of any literature put out by PERS and not the right-wingers would demonstrate this categorically.

As to your other point about why I don't believe in school choice is because I don't believe in redeploying funds directed at public schools to the private schools. If you want choice, pay for it like I do. Don't eviscerate the public schools to carry out an agenda designed for that purpose. We have school choice now. You apply, get your child accepted, every school has scholarship programs, and your child can get in on his/her merits and your ability to pay. Can't pay but your child has merit, I haven't seen one qualified student turned away from the schools we've been associated with.

But school choice/voucher people want their money in lieu of the money given to public schools. I don't want that as I'm not out to ruin the public school system. With time, the right effort, and money they could improve significantly.

Sid, No need to wait long.

Could you be any more of a liar? No. I'll also say you are not simply mistaken but you are indeed lying.

Of course, as you know, Oregon SAT scores have never been tops in the country. That link to the college board web site has not a single listing with Oregon among the top states and you know it. Oregon scores have lingered around 25th for years with a steady decline in our lead over the national average all during the implementation of CIM/CAM. But the college board does not rank states. In fact they advise against using SAT scores for ranking schools, students or states and for very good reasons. Too many variables including percentage of students tested and socio-economic differences.

But you rise to the level of the ODE, OSBA and the Oregonian deceit as they have perpetrated the SAT lies for a dozen or more years. And every cabal defending stakeholder repeats it over and over again. The only place you can point readers to any Oregon tops in SAT scores is at ODE, OSBA or Oregonian stories.

As it is Oregon students should be doing slightly better given our socio-economic profile.

Your assertion is perfect deomonstration of the willingness of some in this state to use blatant lies to protect their turf.

I'm so gald you popped up with that farce. It shows your low level of integrity.

Now, where's the beef? You made a strong claim. Said it was "fact not fiction".

Harry:"Why are you against school choice and vouchers?"

That's easy. Because I don't want my taxes going to support your church. Because I want my education tax dollars going to education.

Next?

Curt

I do not wish to offend any of the normal people or nut jobs who have commented above, but ...

If you accept the premise of Thomas L. Friedman, et al, (which I do), you recognize that Oregon and the US are locked in an epic battle against India, China, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. etc. etc. etc. to preserve our standard of living. The ONLY people who count in this new world order of economic battle are engineers and scientists. I would like to think that friendly humanitarian social science majors such as myself (BA Psychology, '75) will win the war, but obviously that won't happen.

So let's cut to the chase. How does Oregon produce many many many many more engineers, chemists, physicists (sp?), computer scientists, math PhDs, etc. You know, the people who are smarter than we are. I do not know the answer, but I am absolutely confident that the answer has nothing to do with whining about neighborhood schools, equal opportunity or democratic control of schools or teacher union power.

I suspect the answer may be tied to the Asian system of education which separates the talented/gifted at a young age and provides extraordinary training for them to the possible disadvantage of the less-gifted. I am afraid of that model because I don't know if my grandson will be selected for the "high road". But the option of continuing to grind out an endless stream of mediocre students seems very dangerous for the US.

So, Mr. Gates, I say give us all your ideas and let's see how many brilliant scientists you can train, hopefully including my grandson!

You could also create different tracks

That has already been tried and failed miserably. It was called CIM/CAM.

there are some kids who, let's face it, are never going to college and are never going to have complicated jobs.

I agree. But that was part of the CIM/CAM problem. Forcing kids to take courses like algebra is an experiment in failure. Because "lets face it", there are kids who will never "get" algebra.

But school choice/voucher people want their money in lieu of the money given to public schools. I don't want that as I'm not out to ruin the public school system.

It wont ruin anything. Schools get money based on that child's attendance. If the child isnt there, they dont need the money to educate him/her right? Since you send your kid to private school, you are sending the government system money it doesnt need to educate your child.

Jon writes: "t wont ruin anything. Schools get money based on that child's attendance. If the child isnt there, they dont need the money to educate him/her right? Since you send your kid to private school, you are sending the government system money it doesnt need to educate your child."

The individual school doesn't get the money, but it does go into the country common school fund. If you take the money back out that fund to provide vouchers for school choice, the school districts do lose money.

I've not met more than a handful of parents in the private school settings we've been in that expected a government handout to send their child to an essentially religious school. None of us object to paying property taxes to support public education even though we don't make use of the system. Public education benefits EVERYONE regardless of its use. By your logic, people without children or people whose children are grown shouldn't have to support the public schools either.

Sorry but if you want to give your child a private education, you can make the same sacrifices we make. If your child is bright enough and you financially needy enough, there are plenty of ways to get scholarships for your child to attend.

I'm just not in favor of diverting ANY money intended for public education to support private education, religious or secular, or for home-schooling. Those are personal choices and if you want to make them, make the sacrifices needed to do so. We know many people who do.

An earlier comment suggested using Washtington DC as a guinea pig district for a large scale education experiment. Portlanders are lucky, we already have a guinea pig for our educational experiments. Jefferson High School has been the subject of experiment after experiment. Even the citywide K-8 reconfiguration was tested first in the Jefferson cluster.

The latest experiment is using Gates foundation money to divide Jefferson into four separate academies: two for 9th-12th graders, two for 7th-12th graders, one for boys, one for girls, two for boys and girls, three at Jefferson, one at Tubman.

Two years earlier Jefferson was divided into two separate schools using money from the Portland Schools Foundation: one for 9th & 10th graders, and one for 11th & 12th graders.

After years of experiments, not surprisingly, Jefferson isn't thriving. Constant changes would make it impossible to build upon the successes and fix the problems, and to create a stable learning environment.

Probably not a single school in the district would be thriving right now if it had been subjected to the series of educational experiments that have been performed on Jefferson. We owe those students a debt of gratitude for sacrificing their high school education so that our kids don't have to.

Kari, This proves you are a purveyor of propaganda. That OSBA BS is just that. And if you had a shred of integrity you would not be repeating it. This entire sham has been thoroughly debunked over and over again. Anyone with any are and concern for public education in Oregon should be outraged at the deceit this fraudulent claim represents. We cannot and will not have sound policy making in our public school system when it is hobbled with this sort of institutionalized dishonesty.
Furthermore, the college board repeatedly warns against using SAT scores for ranking purposes. Under any qualifier.

That so called "second in the nation" claim is entirely concocted by Oregon bureaucrats, absent any validity at all and is as dishonest as it gets. There is no legitimacy to the "among the 23 states that had at least 50 percent of their high school graduates tested." The college board has never advised anyone to make such a qualifier and go ahead with a ranking. Even in these 23 states those who are closer to 50% tested score higher than those who test 80%. Naturally the higher the percentage of students tests the lower the average score. Oregon tests just above 50% of their students. Comparing Oregon SAT performance to only those who test 50% or more is no more legitimate than comparing Oregon to only those who test less.

ANY intellectually honest look at Oregon student performance shows it to be mediocre. SAT, ACT NAEP, they all line up mediocre.

The hypocrisy rings loud with the same Oregon bureaucrats touting Oregon ACT scores as tops in the country. Of course in the case of ACT no deceitful qualifier is needed because only 12% of Oregon college bound seniors (East coast Ivy League bound) take the ACT. So naturally the average score is high. Just as are SAT scores in a State where only 12% take the SAT.

So you and the Oregon Department of Education, where the OSBA gets there sham, are not comparing apples-to-apples at all. You are distorting data and spreading misinformation. Interestingly, if one were to study the ACT scores, you would find that there are a number of states who ACT test 40.50 and 60% of their students, and they out perform Oregon's 12% tested. Should Oregon ramp up the percentage of students tested with ACT they'll see a significant decline in the average score and the need to cook up a phony qualifier will arise as well.

ODE and OSBA will then exclude those states where a lesser minority take the ACT and reposition Oregon students as tops in the country.

Then you and your pals will gladly use the deceit to defend the status quo control of public education and the miserable policies it perpetrates.

Oops! Bigtime!

Oregon is second, read that, second in the nation in SAT scores behind... Washington. And our scores are going up,up, up!

http://www.osba.org/hotopics/testing/sat.htm

So sorry. Second. Not first. Second.

Betsy writes: "On the heals of decades of perpetual Jefferson failure at the hands of all things status quo, a near immediate judgement is passed that "Gates" barely a year old effort is worthless?????"

Quite the opposite is true Betsy. Jefferson has not had the privilege of being "status quo" in decades. Jefferson has been the test site for each and every new educational reform, because there's so much grant money out there for the "poor Black kids". Jefferson parents are sick and tired of their children being used as perpetual guinea pigs and their school targeted repeatedly as the "pilot" (as is once again the case in the Gates grant).

The Gates grant Jefferson connection was behind-the scenes and dishonest. Vicki Phillips paraded the Jefferson Design Team around and then misrepresented the entire process. EVERY ONE of the "supposed" design team recommendations was pre-determined in the Gates Grant. Too bad Vicki Phillips, The Portland Schools Foundation and Gates didn't tell the Design Team the outcomes had already been decided. Too bad Vicki Phillips, the School Board, The Portland Schools Foundation and Gates didn't give a damn that no one spoke in favor of, but HUNDREDS of spoke against, Gates' pre-determined plans of breaking the already-small school up even smaller, offering fewer and fewer courses, etc. It went forward just as planned.

It didn't matter because Gates, Phillips and the Portland Schools Foundation pre-determined the outcomes. As Sue said, this is about Gates pushing his "will" on Portland, whether we like it or not.

Now there's the new situation with Hopson/SEI being given obscene amounts of decision-making power at the expense of parents (Jefferson Community Advocacy board - JCAB). This was also behind-the-scenes and dishonest. Once again, the Gates grant pre-determined this very specific outcome. Once again, too bad Vicki Phillips, Portland Schools Foundation, Gates and Hopson didn't bother to tell the people who served on the "Core" team "supposedly" determining the outcomes. Once again, these folks volunteered their time in good faith only to have a Gates-grant, pre-determined agreement signed without their knowledge or input.

I have no problem accepting grant money for things that have the support of the community BEFORE the grant is applied for, as long as the process and outcomes are transparent and the public has input on on the front end. But when the grantor decides in the beginning what the outcomes will be, the superintendent and school board push the grantor's agenda dishonestly and with back-room deals, when the community does not support the outcomes, when public school parents and families are being aside to grant control to the wealthy, when dishonestly reigns, when it results in disparate treatment of children who are poor and/or of color - this is nothing more than fraud and shame. Our children are NOT FOR SALE to the highest bidder! Not all money is good money.

And the rest of Portland, you better watch out. Also as part of the Gates-grant's "secondary transformation initiative", it is spelled out very clearly how Gates, PPS and the Portland Schools Foundation will force the "civic will" (Gates's will) throughout the rest of PPS. And it has already begun. Check out the Portland Schools Foundation website about the plan just rolled out involving the garnering of and pushing the "civic will". Numerous businesses and "PPS partners" are already on board. HMMMM I wonder why? Because, it's already been written and decided upon by Gates, Phillips and the Foundation.

If anyone is interested, I have a complete copy of the Gates grant and secondary transformation initiative. Request a copy on this post if you desire; read it for yourself, then decide.

Jefferson got no pre-warning. The rest of Portland; you're being warned. Vicki Phillips has now been rewarded quite handsomely by Gates for the way she and the school board forced Gates' "will" on Jefferson; don't allow it to happen to the rest of the city.

Make sure any current or future grant money will accomplish what the residents of this city support and desire.

Right on, Joe.

Now, here's the corollary to your post: while Gates is pushing his "small schools initiative" in the high schools, PPS is consolidating elementaries and middle schools into mega-schools. The advertised numbers are 400-600 per school, but some in the Grant Cluster, for example, will be in the 700's. Furthermore, during the recent school board campaign, David Wynde was heard to say something about consolidating grades K-8 until they are in the 700-900 range.

Would David want his children to attend a primary school that large?

I speculate that the PPS agenda is to push more children into focus options for which they can get federal grant money, or small charters for which they are required to allocate less money (per student) and take less responsibility for educational outcomes.

End result? No more "neighborhood" schools in PDX. Just focus options, charters, and mega-schools.

Just remember, you heard it here first.

You got it right Zarwen. To lend credence to your speculation, I forgot to mention the Gates grant pre-determines, in writing, support for charter schools also! And the Gates small-schools are nothing more than conversion of neighborhood schools into little focus options the community didn't ask for. What high schools have the most students transferring out? Answer: the small schools; Roosevelt, Jefferson , Marshall. Where are the students transferring? Answer: to the the large, comprehensive high schools.

Seems those in Portland like small elementary and large, comprehensive high schools. Yet Gates, Phillips, the Portland Schools Foundation this school board are going the opposite direction.

Hope things will change with Adkins on board, and even more in 2 years, before our school district becomes the Gates/Broad unified.

By the way, do some research on Eli Broad; he's definitely a "neo-liberal".

That's more than funny Sid. You, a teacher and the deceit continues. And as evidence you cite a link to one of the institutional liars themselves? Are you crazy? The OSBA,Oregon School Boards Association, is one of the primary liars when it comes to this fraud. Along with the Oregon Department of Education, (where they get the lie) and the Oregon Business Council the OSBA uses this farce to promote and defend Oregon public education policies and those who craft them. These dishonest folks even used the SAT lie to defend CIM/CAM, the mother of all school reform failures. That outcome based experiment used out students as rats in a cage as the 15 year expensive CIM/CAM flop distracted, annoyed, aggrivated and stagnated our classrooms, teachers ans students. And who has been held accountable? No one.
And here they are still using their same lies as teacher Sid repeats them.

Here's the rest of the story.

"SAT Scores – Is your state “Cooking its Books?”

If your local newspaper or state school district is making claims about national leadership in SAT scores of its college-bound students, you should take another look at how these results are determined, to see if there is something funny going on.
An interesting fact about average Student Aptitude Test (SAT) scores for each state, is that they are highly correlated to student participation. Generally, the more students in any state who take the SAT, the lower the states’ overall average SAT score will be; the lower the participation, the higher the state SAT score.
Actually, SAT scores for any state are more a measure of student participation then they are of student performance. This is the probably the main reason the College Testing Service warns against making state-by-state comparisons, calling then “INVALID.” But some irresponsible state school departments and journalists do it anyway, to make their state look good. Some even manipulate the data to make their state look much better than it deserves, using a technique known in accounting circles as “cooking the books.”
Because SAT scores are so closely tied to participation, a favorite trick of these “book cookers” is to throw out all the states with lower student participation -- thus higher test scores -- and compare their home state ONLY to those with higher participation – and thus lower scores. 
“Montana leads nation in SAT scores, among states where at least 30 percent of students took the test;” or “Washington nationwide school leader, among states where at least half the students sat for SAT.”
Look for the tell-tale “participation qualifier,” which is used by the “book cookers” to eliminate higher-scoring states. In the two examples above, Montana’s raw scores actually put it in only 22nd place. Washington was only 23rd. This “qualifier” is ideally suited to goal of the book cookers, because it normally does not appear in headlines announcing “Colorado nationwide SAT leader” (“among states with at least one-quarter of students tested”). And the public tends to remember only the headline, which is repeated often in quotes and sound bites -- without its limiting qualifier. 
There are numerous states who could have claimed to be first or second in nationwide SAT scores. If your state is one of those, you should probably look at whether its books have been cooked."

Joe, Hold on a minute. By status quo I meant under the conrol and dominance of all things PPS and the decades of clones on the board and in the superintendents office. All the meddling experimentation has been by essentially the same people with all the same political allegiances and hinderances we see today. These same people would allow Jefferson to either be in perpetual meddling or shut down in disgrace rather than turn it over to a proven program run by outsiders with a public school charter. The only mystery is why otherwise well intended people are so willing to let the school rot for decades more rather than admit they have failed and allow others to save it.

True philanthropists give anonymously.

Take a chance on kindness. Blessed are those who can give without remembering and take without forgetting. ~Elizabeth Bibesco.

Posted by Dale Sherbourne on the Neighborhood Schools Alliance Site.

In 2003, when I was still naive about Gates and the small schools movement, I went to the Lewis and Clark conference on Small Schools. It was jammed with PPS administrators and teachers. There were seven of us parents and no students there.

I knew something was wrong when I asked a woman who worked for Meyer Foundation where the money was for small elementary schools. She said there was none.

I really knew something was wrong when an award for championing small schools was given to a certain PPS administrator who months before had strongly advocated closing my daughter's small elementary school and merging it in the oldest building in the district to make a 650 student K-5 school.

I REALLY knew something was wrong when speakers began talking about the sacrifices teachers would have to make to make small schools within schools work.

It was a mind-bending day. I did not begin to understand it fully until I read a Rethinking Schools article written by an Oakland Schools teacher who exposed the Gates Foundation for what it was: a union-busting, pro-privatization corporation.

Two 1/2 years later more was revealed when Glenda Walker, Jefferson PTSA president made her eloquent expose of Phillips and Gates and their bizarre plan to "reform" Jefferson at the PPS board meeting.

Like the first post said--corporations should start by paying fair taxes.We would not be in such a desparate state if big companies were not getting away with starving us out of basic services. . Our children are NOT for sale to the highest bidder, whether it is a big corporation or a church. These are OUR PUBLIC schools.

Right on Ann.

And Betsy you're right about the same people being involved in the perpetual meddling at Jefferson. But they're not necessarily the same people you might think they are.

PPS does not dealt for quite some time directly with Black people. They bypassed Jefferson families in lieu of hand-selected Black "community leaders". These same leaders have had the say in Jefferson for years, while the will of the families has gone down the drain.

No "community leaders" have had more power or influential in Jefferson decision making than Lolenzo Poe and Tony Hopson, and they have done a miserable job. Jefferson families have not gotten a say in decades. They are leaving Jefferson in droves to attend quality comprehensive high schools.

It is time for PPS to STOP giving power to "community leaders" like Hopson. It is Tony Hopson that (as a Portland Public Schools Foundation member) awarded himself the governance grant for Jefferson. It is Tony Hopson that has directly benefitted from the Gates grant. It is Tony Hopson, who has had the ability to raise funds for years - that has watched Jefferson rot so he can take it over as his own charter school. It is Tony Hopson that is using fundraising influence to grant himself even more power - ALL BEHIND CLOSED DOORS - AGAINST THE WILL OF THE FAMILIES.

Jefferson doesn't need any outsiders or insiders to convert Jefferson to a charter school or save it. PPS simply needs to provide what 75% of the families are transferring out for. A quality, comprehensive high school with a wide array of educational choices.

Stop listening to "community leaders" and start providing what the families pay taxes for: a quality public high school.

I hear you Joe. Tell me, wht doesn't the black community object more to the status quo? And I do understand who it is and has been. And why not strongly object to any out-of-stater being brought in as a new super? The Ben Canadas and Vicky Phillips' don't know the community and only serve as lap dogs for the keeping everything the same while play acting out yet another ridiculous and insulting "reform".

Wasn't the Strategic Plan something? God what a waste of time. 600 teachers, administrators and parents getting together and spending countless man hours for months working up a plan that was never implemented. Why? Because it was useless and wouldn't provide any real reform or improvement. Why? Because the district hierarchy always makes sure there is no real change. That's why they are brought in and why the board members are elected. To not change anything. Play make believe reform, oppose charter schools, block any reformers or changes, while rolling over on every teacher contract negotiation.

Please don't even talk about converting Jefferson into a charter school.

Kari, Oh knock it off. Now YOU are fully debunked for it is not Kremer "misusing stats for political purposes" it is you, the OSBA, ODE and others who are lying with a bogus SAT ranking.

BOGUS as in NO Kari it is no less a "fallacy" or dishonest to simply take out 27 states of lesser percentage of students tested and place Oregon at the top. (or second) It's equally not valid to compare all states. What is Kremer's "political purpose" in telling the college board truth about our schools?

Your carefully crafted attempt to cast Kremer as the one misusing the SAT stats is further demonstration of your particular brand of blatant dishonesty. There is not a shred of legitimacy to the ODE-OSBA methods. None. Not by Kremer or I but by the administrators of the SAT, the College Board. ANYONE who checks with the college board will find that Kremer is spot on and that you are carrying a pail of lies for the book cooking ODE establishment. But that's your MO. And here it shines bright with the luster of your political hack polish.

Again, the SAT ranking used by ODE, OSBA, OBC and others is completely fabricated and debunked by the SAT college board guidelines for educators and the media.

Your repeated attempts to legitimize the bogus stat and "tops" ranking claim by repeating the participation qualifier serves only to repeat a lie. Stunning since you yourself apparently think SAT scores should not be used to compare states or universities. Rather obvious intellectual dishonesty as well as the state lie.

Completely irrelevant is your work in higher education marketing, your wife in admissions and your love or hate for the OSBA.

Your mental gymnastics is something. You say you are not aware of any debunking? You must be playing some game or in denial about the college board advising that using SAT scores for ranking purposes is invalid?

How are you then "honestly intrigued"?

Hypocrisy riddled, you turn around the charge suggesting Kremer is one who is "comparing SAT scores" when he is advocating the truth and against any comparison as stated clearly by the college board.

Now for some reason you are tremendously hobbled, disjointed and attempting to cast Kremer as using "fallacy" when you are engaged in full tilt balderdash.

You have no shame. But that's your MO.

And this discussion of SAT ranking fraud shows us why we have a system ripe with politicized hacks and enormous failures such as CIM/CAM. Our system is controlled by people who feel it is OK and neccessary to lie about student perfromance as a means to administer the system.

Marveleous.

SAT Kari SAT

Just as the college board stresses, SAT comparison in any form is not valid. NAEP is valid. Others are. Unfortunately Oregon assessments, having no correlation to any national norm are useless.

Why is it so difficult for you to recognize the state is is misusing, abusing and misleading the public with their concocted SAT ranking? And why would you echo such a farce? Habit? You can't help yourself? Heck the ODE, Castillo, OSBA, COSA and the OBC actually used the SAT fraud as evidence CIM/CAM was working, furthering that massive failure for years. Could they have been any more dishonest? That's as big a bunch of whoppers as any Bush lies. Yet you and yours apparently recognize none of the lack of truthiness when it comes to our Oregon and the democrat controlled establishment.
Is that just your MO?

Betsy -- Your rage is counterproductive. I think most of us understand that you don't agree with the SAT rankings used by Oregon to compare itself to other states. You don't have to call Kari a liar 20 times to make your point -- in fact, it makes you sound like a lunatic.

I, for one, am intrigued by the idea that states use selective criteria when discussing SAT scores to make themselves look better. I'd love to see how many state and local newspapers claim that their state is in the top five. What an excellent media critique that would be! However, if we can't use SAT scores to compare schools, then I'm curious why you view Oregon public schools as such an unqualified failure. What evidence do you have that they are worse than other schools nationwide?

My own evidence, which is purely anecdotal, is that my PPS education was far superior to the mostly private-school educated college friends I encountered in the northeast. My high-school friends and I all excelled in college and grad school and now in our careers, so I'm proud of my public school education. But if you have evidence that our public schools are bad, I'd like to hear it.

mrfearless47 writes: When are you going to stop believing these lies? I don't make more in retirement than when I was teaching. In fact, I know thousands of PERS retirees and have never met one who makes more in retirement than while working. This fact applies to only a very small percentage of the PERS workforce and involved some very unusual circumstances. It never affected more than a few hundred people. Time to let this lie die its death. It is patently false and a careful review of any literature put out by PERS and not the right-wingers would demonstrate this categorically."

PERS numbers study 30 years in # of all retirees 2001 391 99% 3146 66% average of base pay 2002 670 96% 4605 68%
2003 942 93% 7631 66%
2004 471 84% 3259 55%
2005 393 84% 2548 51%

so in 2005 393 retired with 30 years and averaged 84% of base pay, total 2548 (including 393) average 51%. That is an incredibly expensive system, #1 in the country I believe. Say all you want, but call up your NON-PERS retired friends and average what they make in retirement. And I wont mention that your non pers friends didn't get a guaranteed rate of return, or 6% kicked in by the state, or the magic lump sum doubling wackology? PERS is undefendable, period.

Kari, Your partisenship, bias and political hackery has you completely hobbled. The SAT thang began with "teacher" Sid:

Posted by: Sid Leader | May 21, 2007 12:22:54 PM

"Okay, then why do OUR kids score the highest SAT scores in the country, year in and out?" Facts, not fiction, at www.sat.org. Have a great day, folks! And be sure to give me an answer, when you find one. I won't wait up."

And you can't seem get even the tow simplest points here.

One, the Oregon education establishment are cronic liars about student performance, especially with the SAT farce.

Two, not you, I or anyone should be including or excluding states in any pretense of "apples-to-apples" comparison of SAT scores. That's the biggest point here. Doing so in any mixture is invalid, for good reasons, according to the college board.

The only reason our State officials lie about SAT rankings is to defend the policies and their own control of public education.

Now we have Miles sayinghe is intrigued by the SAT lies.

Why? I am not enraged. You should be outraged that State officials would lying. There is not a ranking in existence, SAT or any other, that has our students "ranking" tops or near the top, period.

How in the hell is pointing out the truth "counter-productive". It isn't "me" who doesn't "agree with the SAT rankings used by Oregon to compare itself to other states". It's the institution, the College Board, who lectured that it is invalid and inappropriate to do so.

Can any of you understand that? What does it take for you to grasp this central point?

Kari was lying and I'll say it 20 more times. The real lunatics are those of you failing to grasp such a simple College Board directive.

Yet Miles is "intrigued by the idea" states manipulate
SAT scores to make themselves look better.

This entire arguement has been made to our newspapers and yet every year they echo the falsehoods. Other states do the same thing as mentioned above.

It is OF COURSE an "excellent media critique" thathas been made over and over again.
But so what? They refuse to respond.

No we can't use SAT scores to compare states or schools. How in the world is pointing that reality out mean I view Oregon schools as such an "unqualified failure"?

There is a plethera of evidence that shows Oregon students and schools to be very average. That's reality. It's also the same place they were before the CIM/CAM failure over 15 years. Truthiness was also rarely evident during all of the CIM/CAM promotion and defense which continued right up till imminent demise when Castillo finally punted the mess.

There are plenty of good public schools in Oregon delivering many excellent students to colleges everywhere. My own daughter is one of them. I too am proud of her public schools and the education she got. That's not the issue here. The issue is the misrepresentation of the average SAT scores as tops or near the top in the country. That is a bald faced lie and those telling it know it to be.

Miles, you should be outraged that the State would, among other crimes, purposefully misuse data in order to bolster support and sustain failed programs. That's no way to deliver higher quality education to more students and genuinely raise average student performance.

Our system will be stuck in mediocrity forever with this wholly disingenous approach. No ifs ands or buts about it.

Betsy:

I think part of the reason the Jefferson community hasn't risen up against what their "community leaders" have done to the school is partially because the majority of the public doesn't know! All they hear and see is the media spin coming from PPS and these well-known "leaders". If there had not been folks who completed FOIAs to obtain documentation of the Gates Grant and the SEI/Governance grant (and other information) NO ONE - including Jefferson staff, administration, parents, site council, PTSA, the general public - would have known that the Design Teams and SEI Core Teams were just cover for what had already been secretly negoiated between Gates, Portland Schools Foundation, Vicki Phillips, Cynthia Harris and Tony Hopson. And even now, only those very intimately aware are beginning to speak out and realize the extent of the manipulation and misrepresentation that has been going on at Jeff for years.

Another reason the Jefferson failure has perpetuated is that PPS has very carefully chosen their "leaders"; most have pre-existing business interests with PPS. This not only creates a conflict of interest, but compromises the "leaders'" abililty to advocate or speak truth.

For example, after the Jefferson Design Team (chosen by Vicki Phillips- mostly "leaders") realized they had been duped (just used as window dressing to drive a Gates-grant agenda they had not known existed), they had a "private" meeting with the superintendent to express their distain and anger. However, NOT ONE OF THE "LEADERS" on the team, except Vanessa Gaston (Urban League President) before she left for Vegas, has spoken out publicly against this fraudulent, shameful process and implementation. They have sat back and allowed these pre-determined, dishonest, undesired outcomes to go forward - because to speak out publicly would jeopardize their standing and power.

That's why allowing "leaders" to make decisions for neighborhood schools in any part of the city - including Jefferson - must absolutely come to an end - NOW. All decision-making must involve ALL interested families and parents. All decision making must be completely open and transparent. The school board needs to stop ignoring the voice of families in favor of these "community leaders".

Would any of us keep hiring the same people who have failed miserably and repeatedly? Of course not. Yet that's exactly what PPS is doing with these Jefferson "leaders". The "leaders" had their chance - now they need to step aside.

"Would any of us keep hiring the same people who have failed miserably and repeatedly?"

Sadly, we just DID--when we reelected David Wynde and Bobbie Regan to the School Board, along with a LOT of help from the Fourth Estate. Had they had the guts to endorse Schultz over Wynde, the outcome would have been different. How do I know? Because the percentage of votes for Adkins and Wynde was nearly identical. Three out of four newspapers in Portland endorsed this unworkable combination. That tells me that the majority of people who bothered to vote just copied their newspaper onto their ballot. And, sadly, no one ever stepped up to the plate to run against Regan.

The one bright spot in this outcome is that Ruth Adkins will be joining the school board soon. But with Wynde still there, she is going to have an uphill battle all the way, and I am not sure how much help she will get from the rest of the Board--if any.

I guess this is a bitter lesson in people getting the government they deserve.

Zarwen:

So right you are about Wynde and Regan - and I would add Sargent. Michele would have been an excellent (and much needed) addition to the board.

As far as Adkins, whatever help she doesn't get from the board she needs from the people - US - to provide support and let the rest of the board know we're serious.

Then when elections come around in 2 years, Sargent can be replaced. So can Ryan and Henning if necessary.

And we keep going until we get a school board that is honest, open, truly cares about providing EVERY child equitable and outstanding educational opportunities and represents the interests of the taxpayers they were elected to serve.

So tell me why "Jefferson Public Charter High School" is not a guaranteed remedy? It certainly is. One which would turn around the High School immediately, soon becoming the shinnning star of the district with the families of the local community having far more participation and impact while enjoying the tremendous benefits and pride success brings.

Oh I know the answer, the teacher's union and their politicized School Board object. Which is also why the next superintendent will be another clone bringing faux reform and the sustained status quo. I find it amazing that the many sincere school advocates can't recognize the dysfunction they support. When flops such as the Portland Strategic Plan, Ben Canada, and now Vicky Phillips are regular chapters in the PPS story one has to wonder what is going on. Where have all the athentic leaders and progress makers gone?

Betsy writes re: Jefferson as a Charter School.

I believe you're delusional to be SO confident that turning Jefferson into a Charter School will have dramatic effects. Nothing in life is this sure and Jefferson could turn out to be an unmitigated disaster as a charter school just as easily as it is under the present model.

I'm not opposed to trying the model, but I'd let every parent in the community have the opportunity to escape before the experiment started. Charter Schools require a level of parental involvement that not all schools have or can sustain. I expect that if parents and students were permitted to opt in or out of such an experiment, you'd be left with the students and their families who want to participate and the results would be more successful than the current model. Qualified and limited school choice for families in areas where all traditional models have tried and failed is an option, but only a fool and a cock-eyed optimist would start out with the belief that the option will be an unqualified success. Life just doesn't work that way.

Mrfearless, I notice you removed the word "Public" from Jefferson Public Charter School. A ploy public charter school opponents, (union/staus quo failure advocates)use to falsely give the public the impression they are not public schools.
Your level of understanding of charter schools appears to be limited to the opponent's routine rhetoric.
But that's OK. Perhaps you can be enlightened.

Let's start with what we agree on. Jefferson is currently, and has been for a couple decades, an unmitigated disaster as run by the district bureaucracy.

Where we immediately part emanates from your misunderstanding of why I am "SO confident". Rather than your presumption that I am "delusional" I am familiar with the tried and true, long established successful Charter School programs available across the country. Programs which do not equate to "stating an experiment". Furthermore, any eventual charter organization and program chosen for Jefferson Public Charter High School would be thoroughly vetted with the district to the complete satisfaction of the community and parents ahead of time. Whereas there are proven charter models readily available the risk of experimentation gone bad is essentially non existent and pales by the contrasting comparison to the reckless endangerment in the experimentation the status quo regularly perpetrates on many of our public schools.

Additionally contrasting is the inability of any parents in the community to have the opportunity to escape before the district or State experiments start. The mother of all assaults by experimentation, CIMCAM, had no such established escape hatch. A few parents took advantage of little know short lived loop hole and opted out their children the powers that be did all they could to keep the bulk of parents and student in line and in the experiment gone terribly bad.
Only a fool would sit around waiting for yet another education disaster to drag Jefferson through yet another decade of same old same old. There is without question education expertise readily available to address and correct the needs of Jefferson High and many others. They are not politically correct or controlled by the current education establishment so they are rejected out of hand without consideration. Just as was a free school for New Columbia Village which could have been provided by the very successful Heritage Academies. Yes, this Charter School company provides the school and all that goes with it at their cost. I've toured one of the Heritage Charter schools without escort and talked to the staff. Nearly all of which came from traditional public schools dominated by union and government bureaucracies. The feedback was the stuff of certain and absolute remedy for Jefferson. From parental involved in the socio-economic diverse community to teacher and administrator satisfaction the teaching and learning environment was quire simply superior. That was 10 years ago. That model has been repeated over and over again where government districts have failed.

If it is your and other's intent to have Jefferson, and it's students to come, remain last in line for such remedies that is truly sad. Life shouldn't work this way.

Your concerns are sadly misplaced and seemingly out of order when viewing the next volley of district mediocrity and failure approaching.

Will any of you apologize ahead of time for your unmitigated neglect and allegiance to the wholly failed current model? Unlikely, denial is much easier.

Betsy:

If you really support giving the Jefferson community a genuine voice in their neighborhood public school, the last thing in the world you would be advocating for is a charter school at Jefferson.

Not only does the Jefferson cluster have charter schools coming out of its ears - but Jefferson families already made it abundently clear (through the design-team process) that they want PPS to provide at Jefferson a comprehensive, 4-year high school with all the courses and programs available at the Wilsons, Lincolns and Grants.

By you pushing for a charter school at Jeff, you are doing exactly what PPS has done for years: not listening to the tax-paying residents and families of the Jefferson cluster. Not only that, your charter school idea pushes yet another unwanted redesign on this school and community.

I am curious as to whether or not you reside in the Jefferson cluster. If so, there are already many charter schools from which you can choose if that is your preference. If not, enough with the Jefferson charter school idea already!

Thanks!

With all due respect Teresa it would seem to me that the last thing you should be expecting is that PPS will provide Jefferson a comprehensive, 4-year high school with all the courses and programs available at the Wilsons, Lincolns and Grants.

I mean come on. If that was going to happen it would have been done long ago. You seem to be suggesting waiting another 20 years for what was not done by PPS during the past 20.

By you dismissing a Public charter school for Jefferson arn't you doing exactly what PPS has done for years? Prop themselves up as the only means to the end you seek?

The only answer, IMO is to take control of Jeffersonout of the hands of the district model and heirarchy. Furthermore I don't beleive for moment that the community has been given a clear presentation of what and how a charter HS would function. While at the same time it is district who is pushing yet another redesign of the chairs on the Titanic.

If you really support giving the Jefferson community a genuine voice in their neighborhood public school, the last thing in the world you should be advocating for is the sustained control by those who have proven to everyone they will deliver nothing but more of the same for Jefferson and the community.

I would not be surprised to learn that the "design-team process" has never looked at Jefferson being removed from district operation. The last thing the establishment wants is success delivered by others. So they must oppose, obstruct and prohibit that from happening at all costs. If it means yet another generation of Jefferson students being ill-served so be it. I think it is long past time to say "enough with the district at Jefferson already!"